Carlos Alberto Cortez

This could be actually affected by #107 - if we don't do any changes, then yeah, we could keep this renaming PR/iteration. Thoughts?

Hey everybody! I created this Issue as a way to track the incoming RC iterations towards the 0.32.0 Release (just as we did with the previous 0.31 one). Feel free...

Hey @adriancole > We still finish on close but somehow people know this won't happen later? If so, I disagree with this solution as it will just delay problem. We...

> `ScopeManager#active()` -- still there and undeprecated.. it should not be there Based on #301 it was agreed that we will leave it in place, as some users may still...

That being said, I'd like to hear what other people have to said about this one, and I'd still go ahead and do a first RC for 0.32, at it...

@tedsuo I think we can mention that for 0.33 we will be removing them altogether - the v030 package made more sense as it was an important-but-required API breaking change....

@pavolloffay Sure, will be checking it prior to do our RC1 ;)

@felixbarny > could you clarify the reason for empty string vs null? I do not remember all the details, but I remember the starting points were 1) To follow the...

> I'd rather check for non-null than checking hasSpanId first tbh. I agree on this. Adding extra methods for doing the same does not give us much IHMO. > Why...

> could you clarify the reason for empty string vs null? Actually, this reasoning is mentioned in the spec: https://github.com/opentracing/specification/blob/master/rfc/trace_identifiers.md#tracer-support ;)